Great channel for info

[Beanbomb]

I bumped into this channel recently, and it makes fantastic videos on cavalry uniforms and gear (union). I highly recommend you check it out.

https://m.youtube.com/channel/UCezbVOElhYe2hifloUHxypA

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ov5wZ-gfQxc

[Steven Dacus]

Re: Great channel for info

Ben,

Thanks for the compliment! We enjoy making these videos as anything Cav related to help those new to the hobby is rare. We are actually posting a Shell Jacket video soon. Thanks again!

[rmilstead]

Re: Great channel for info

Guys,

My mother used to have an expression "If you can't say something nice then don't say anything at all". I probably will be judged by some as violating such wise advice but will try to provide some thoughts both on where two of these video's provide accurate or useful information and where they, unfortunately, don't. Probably the latter will be most commented on. The videos that I reviewed are those on Mounted Service Jackets and Mounted Service trousers. Some of my comments are based upon information in the recently released (previously unpublished) 1865 Quartermaster Manual (Bvt. Maj. Gen George H. Crosman, author - Earl J. Coates and Frederick C. Gaede, editors) and personal study of a number of original examples.

The video on the jacket is generally reasonable on exterior details and to the extent it does present one original for comparison is useful. I applaud the emphasis on pattern correctness especially fit of the body, cut of the sleeves, use of proper trim material, and such details as the proper construction of the rear "pillows". The original presented appears to be a contract version. It has what is described as a "muslin" lining which would be very unusual and while all cotton is not unknown among some of the more substandard contractor products it would never be muslin which was used in sleeve linings. The QM specification called for either white or gray domet flannel although heavier "jean style" wool/cotton twill material is often seen, sometimes in multiple colors. One cannot tell from the video whether the lining is truly muslin or actually domet flannel mistakenly identified by the presenter but if it was all cotton muslin it should have been identified as unusual in original jackets. Otherwise the impression is left that this was typically what was used. The exterior wool had a more dramatic kersey weave "diagonal swale" than usually is seen but kersey is often seen in originals as is what appears to be broad cloth. The QM Manual does not specify kersey fabric for MSJs or frocks just "dark blue woolen cloth, pure indigo dyed" implying both are correct presumably. The NJS reproduction coat has a simulation of Schuylkill Arsenal plaid lining fabric which is seen in some SA jackets as is white and gray domet flannel, jeans type material, and other types. They (SA) apparently used whatever they could find that was cheap. Unfortunately nothing was said about the presence of padding in the front of original jackets nor the provision of functional buttoned sleeve cuffs specified for these coats which are significant details in evaluating the quality and accuracy of a reproduction. Overall a very superficial discussion with way to much lecturing on the importance of authenticity and too little on the details that are found originally in original jackets that should be found in quality reproductions.

The video on Mounted Service Trousers spends a lot of time on the details of Footman's trousers and then doesn't spend any significant time on the differences in the Mounted versions except for the peripheral references to "seat reinforcement" without even showing what those are. Much time is devoted to the proper material although the presenter's assertion that sky blue kersey was the result of mixing blue and white fibers (it was so specified in the Mexican War era up to 1857) is not true as the Civil War era material was supplanted from 1861 onward with (mostly piece) dyed fabric which the QM Manual specifies to be "sky blue woolen kersey, pure indigo dyed". The 11 oz. weight quoted was correct for 3-4 (27") width material only not 6-4 (54") which was 22 oz. The latter is important to those buying material today since most wool is 54"- 60". Anyone who has tried to reproduce Mounted Service trousers knows that there are many other differences that are not seen from the outside. While true that they are also found in some footman's trousers, the legs in Mounted Service trousers have a wider profile which is needed to accommodate the application of the reinforcement and this is noticeable when they are worn. Also significant is that the back, crotch, and leg inseams are reversed on Mounted Service trousers so that seam allowances under the reinforcement are on the outside of the pants to prevent rubbing and abrasion (skin) when worn while riding. These things are very important details that should be found in quality reproductions. Also after a long dissertation on the use of belts or braces or both (somewhat irrelevant to the subject of the video) the presenter does not discuss the fact, based upon existing original examples, as noted by other researchers (see Nick Nichols and Ken Smith "The Great Trowser Hoax", Civil War Cavalry Review Nos 1-3, 1989 ) and what is documented in the QM Manual, Mounted Service trousers notably were made with six suspender buttons as opposed to Footman's trousers which originally were specified to have only four. A small difference perhaps since both are made today to accommodate repro braces which typically have "Y" style front connections. I applaud the discussion of the buttons found at the leg hems on Mounted Service trousers as one difference that was noted but the other areas are important and were not discussed.

Sorry to point these things out but I believe that such ignoring or misrepresenting such details seriously detracts from the impact and validity of what is being presented.

Dick Milstead
The Company of Military Historians

[Steven Dacus]

Re: Great channel for info

Mr. Milstead,

Thanks so much for the constructive criticism on my videos! Seriously, where where you when we were trying to do research for these videos! Obviously, as you have pointed out, we are still significantly ignorant in a variety of issues but do the best we can or know how to do. Would you mind if I PM you and pick your brain a bit for other research projects we have coming up?

[rmilstead]

Re: Great channel for info

Steven,
Certainly you may PM me if you like or email me directly at a356cguy@aol.com. either way I am glad to discuss with you.

Dick Milstead

[Steven Dacus]

Re: Great channel for info

Email Sent. Thanks.